More by luck tbhI like the way the base brick slips are quite a good match to the house too
More by luck tbhI like the way the base brick slips are quite a good match to the house too
All the calcs are done, the manufacturer has pre approved the system with jhai(building control) so providing you follow the instructions(I broke the rules and read them ) so it's just a case of inspection/photos as required.That is interesting to see a modular build system for extensions.
Do they do the structural calcs etc too?
Did building control inspect the pad founds etc and is the steel secured down to them?
All the calcs are done, the manufacturer has pre approved the system with jhai(building control) so providing you follow the instructions(I broke the rules and read them ) so it's just a case of inspection/photos as required.
The legs are rawlbolted to the foundations
All the calcs are done, the manufacturer has pre approved the system with jhai(building control) so providing you follow the instructions(I broke the rules and read them ) so it's just a case of inspection/photos as required.
The legs are rawlbolted to the foundations
It's going to look like this, albeit we decided to clad it as the brick slips are imperial so wouldn't match up to the walls. It's all sips and the roof is tiled with lightweight tiles, there's also 2 700mm wide rooflights that run from ridge to fascia..Is it going to be a glass walled and roofed structure?? Or is it brick above dpc with a tiled roof??
Independent building control are checking it. Local guys were exceedingly unhelpful, then they were upset when jhai notified them lolJust bear in mind that regardless if the system is building control compliant or not you must still make a building control application with your local authority and they will normally call out to inspect the ground conditions and foundation pad pour etc.
Without this, if you go to sell the house in future it would be flagged up and building control could insist that part of the founds are dug up for inspection etc if they didn't get an application at the time.
This is meant to assist and its no odds to me how you do it just bear this in mind.
Independent building control are checking it. Local guys were exceedingly unhelpful, then they were upset when jhai notified them lol
Ime independent are far better to deal with usually more realistic too.
Building looks good is it still classed as a
Definitely better, having said that I'm working with a developer at the moment and his local authority guys are great.Ime independent are far better to deal with usually more realistic too.
Building looks good is it still classed as a conservatory.
Definitely better, having said that I'm working with a developer at the moment and his local authority guys are great.
It's a fully fledged extension so obviously has to be certified.
On paper it beats latest building regs by a mile
Square footings....ugh.
I wonder if a round footing could be substituted ?
Using a ground auger (if you could get it in your location)
might be an easier job.
12"-18" dia auger with sonotubes is sort of common around here.
Yabutt.....they should be much easier to dig eh ?Round footings would require more concrete to achieve the same thing. From memory it's 30ish percent more.
That's also increased muck away.
Yabutt.....they should be much easier to dig eh ?
Also, would not the diameter of the hole fit inside the square ?
Thereby less concrete and less dirt.
The area is clay so 1m, unfortunately the structure warranty needs 300mm below dpc so holes ended up @1.2m in the end. It's a typical modern build estate so top 450mm was horrible digging being full of builders crap. Because of this the holes all ended up between 550mm and 750mmI presume your in very good ground.
Our footings for even sips structures are approaching 2m deep
I spoke to a specialist auger company who, when they'd finished laughing at the soil conditions said they'd need a fairly large machine to guarantee getting through.. access is 700mm. Post hole digger and flexi tubs ended up being the best way albeit slowSquare footings....ugh.
I wonder if a round footing could be substituted ?
Using a ground auger (if you could get it into your location)
might be an easier job.
12"-18" dia auger with sonotubes is sort of common around here.
And even hand operated augers go pretty big:
Micro digger wouldn't touch next doors it just bounced off!No the volume and the surface area are important factors therefore a cylindrical hole has to be bigger than a square hole. If you made a cylindrical hole that fitted inside the square hole you would have a lower ground bearing capacity.
A 450 square hole can if need be be dug with micro digger. Whereas a augered hole would most likely need a 2.5t- 3t machine which isn't often a viable proposition for a back garden
I saw for a long time on the net drilling options that expand the bottom of the well. The concrete forms a cushion, with a larger footprint. Prevents pile pulling in winter, good pinching.No the volume and the surface area are important factors therefore a cylindrical hole has to be bigger than a square hole. If you made a cylindrical hole that fitted inside the square hole you would have a lower ground bearing capacity.
A 450 square hole can if need be be dug with micro digger. Whereas a augered hole would most likely need a 2.5t- 3t machine which isn't often a viable proposition for a back garden
I saw for a long time on the net drilling options that expand the bottom of the well. The concrete forms a cushion, with a larger footprint. Prevents pile pulling in winter, good pinching.